2018-11-04 23:22:14 UTC
SECOND SIGHT: UN-PERSECUTED LINEAGES FROM OTTO OF ZUTPHEN
Compiled by John Schmeeckle, Oct. 23-Nov. 1, 2018
As explained by several ancestors, "second sight” – a peculiar ability to foresee the future – was a traditional attribute of kings. During the medieval period, individuals with second sight were often persecuted and burned at the stake. If someone with "the sight" was persecuted, this ruined the sight in their descendants, although intermarriage with an un-persecuted lineage could sometimes restore the sight in descendants of such a marriage. However, if two or three generations failed to use the sight, it would usually disappear in that family.
Un-persecuted lineages that maintained the sight through the generations are almost non-existant. In addition to the Zutphen lineage, there is an un-persecuted lineage from the 13th-century marriage of Robert de Valoines with Eve, heiress of Criketot. There is also an earlier lineage from Criketot, with at least two branches. There is a lineage from Coucy (which is mentioned twice below); and a just-discovered Scottish Lamont lineage (descended from the Kings of Ireland), which intermarried with one of the Zutphen lines below. I am currently preparing articles like this one on the lineages from Coucy and from Valoines/Criketot.
Most of the information in this article comes directly from the ancestors. An explanation of communicating with ancestors is appended to the end of this article.
OTTO OF ZUTPHEN
Otto of Zutphen lived in the tenth century. The following statement was transcribed by John Schmeeckle on Oct. 30, 2018.
Zutphen: “Otto, Lord of Zutphen, was the descendant of a line of kings of France. The line had the gift of ‘second sight.’ This enabled the king to look into the future and choose a path that benefited the people. The gift had to be used for no other purpose. This gift was abused by the later kings. The later kings had a problem with difficulties over who would be king. The gift was destroyed.
“Zutphen was descended from a younger brother. The younger brother saw that he would be the ancestor of another line of kings. The king who initiated this line would not be a king. Zutphen understood. This was not to be explained.
“Zutphen understood, because of what his father told him, that Zutphen was unable to use the sight. Zutphen must preserve a lineage. Zutphen must ensure that a line of descendants continued without being persecuted for having the sight.
“Zutphen understood. Some of his descendants would abuse the sight. They would lose. Their families would not prosper. Some of Zutphen’s descendants would use the sight. They would prosper, or not. The use of the sight was not important. What was important was that the sight be used in a proper way, when it was not too dangerous.
“Zutphen also understood. There were generations of the lineage that would be forbidden to use the sight. This was because of persecution. If the sight hid for a generation, it would not affect the lineage.
“Zutphen wanted to be able to not have the sight. Zutphen did not expect to be able to do what was revealed. Zutphen had to maintain his territory. Zutphen had an enemy. The enemy was growing in strength. Zutphen had no hope of resisting. Zutphen saw his successful resistance. Zutphen had to have the will to resist. Otherwise, nothing else that Zutphen saw would come to pass.
“Zutphen willed to resist. Zutphen told his men to expect help. Zutphen did not give details. The men were ambitious. The men were courageous. The men prevailed when the leader of the opposing force was struck down by an arrow.
“Zutphen lived. Zutphen did not talk. Zutphen was hailed. Zutphen did what he intended. Zutphen was never suspected of having the sight. This was the greatest fear of anyone with the sight. If a family was suspected, everything that the family did was scrutinized. This meant that any good fortune was talked about as if it was done by consulting the sight. Zutphen emphasized to his daughter that, if suspicion fell, the person and his or her son or daughter must never use the sight. The instructions must pass to a following generation. The following generation would have to be very careful. This was seen to be effective. Zutphen trained his daughter, and Zutphen his daughter trained her son. Zutphen understood. The son trained his sister. The sister her lineage continued.”
(Nov. 1, 2018) Zutphen: “Zutphen has been understanding the lineages. Zutphen was unable to understand until John Human showed the link. Zutphen now understands. Young has a male-line descent, un-persecuted, from a King with the sight. Zutphen had no expectation. Zutphen now has to think of this lineage as the important one.”
UN-PERSECUTED LINEAGES FROM OTTO OF ZUTPHEN
The following ancestors’ statements (in parentheses) were recorded starting on Oct. 23, 2018.
In the lineage below, #1 is the parent of #2, who is the parent of #3, etc. The lineage branches at #18, with two separate Scottish royal lineages. Many of these people were notable, and they have Wikipedia articles. I have included links to many of these useful articles, but there is no reason to think that everything in these articles is correct. (As an occasional Wikipedia editor, I know both the value and the limitations of the Wikipedia project.) I have often added dates of birth and death from secondary sources: Such data does not come from the ancestors and is not definitive.
The earlier Scottish royal lineage branches at #21 (with different daughters of King James IV). The first branch splits again at #23, with one descent to a Wallace family that left South Carolina, and another descent that eventually merges in Virginia with Lamont/Young, which is the second branch of the earlier Scottish royal lineage.
The later Scottish royal lineage includes a French and Russian royal connection, and eventually merges with one branch of the earlier lineage, in the 1850s marriage of Julia Wallace to William Joseph Coons. Their story (transcribed by John Schmeeckle) is online here: https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Ancestral_Memories:_William_Coons_and_Julia_Wallace
As time permits, I intend to record the stories of many more of the ancestors in these lineages.
1. Otto of Zutphen
“Otto. Otto had the sight. Otto was from a family that had the sight. Otto knew that the sight came from a king. Otto understood. The sight must be used to help others.”
2. Matilda, m. Megingoz of Avalgau. [Megingoz’s Wikipedia page, showing a different mother of his children, is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megingoz_of_Guelders]
“Mathilde. Mathilde was the daughter. Mathilde was not the son. Mathilde had no brother. Mathilde brought the sight. Mathilde saw a lineage. Mathilde understood. Mathilde was to help the lineage continue.”
3. Irmtrude, m. Herbert van Wetterau (c. 930-992), a descendant of Charlemagne. [Herbert’s Wikipedia page is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_of_Wetterau ]
“Irmtrude. Irmtrude was a daughter. Irmtrude had a brother. Irmtrude knew. Irmtrude would be the one.”
4. Udo, Count of Gleiberg
“Udo. Udo was Count. Udo was under another man. Udo understood. Udo waited.”
5. Irmentrud (heiress of Zutphen), m. Rupert of Zutphen.
Irmtrude: "Irmtrude was a daughter. Irmtrude had a brother. The brother did not live.”
6. Gutta (heiress of Zutphen) (b. abt. 1045), m. Ludwig I, Count of Arnstein (c. 1040- c. 1084).
Gutta: "Gutta was a daughter. Gutta had no brother. Gutta had the sight. Gutta knew. Gutta had to have patience. Gutta had patience.”
“Zutphen will speak. Zutphen was aware, because of the sight, that his descendants would be king. Zutphen knew, because of the sight, that Zutphen and his descendants had to continue in a lineage that would not be persecuted. Zutphen understood. A lineage that was persecuted would not lead to a king.”
7. Ludwig III, Count of Arnstein (d. around 1130), m. Udelhild of Odenkirchen. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnstein_Abbey
“Ludwig. Ludwig was Count. Ludwig was under another man. Ludwig had the sight. Ludwig did wisely. Ludwig did not kill.”
8. Agnes von Arnstein (1128-bef. 1179), m. Hendrik I, Count of Guelders and Zutphen (which he inherited from his mother).
"Agnes. Agnes was the daughter. Agnes had no brother. Agnes had the sight. Agnes understood. Agnes had to be patient.”
[Agnes’s son’s descent continues below. Agnes also had a daughter Adelaide, wife of Gerard, Count of Looz. This couple were ancestors of the Delano (De Lannoy) family of Plymouth Colony, but that lineage includes a persecuted generation. However, the Delano family does have an un-persecuted lineage from Coucy.]
(continued Oct. 27, 2018)
9. Otto I, Count of Guelders and Zutphen (1150-1207), m. Richardis of Bavaria (Wittelsbach)
“Otto had the sight. Otto understood. Otto must use the sight to help others. This was part of Otto his training. Otto did not use the sight.”
10. Gerard III, Count of Guelders and Zutphen (c. 1185-1229), m. Margaretha of Brabant.
“Gerard had the sight. Gerard did not use the sight. Gerard understood. The sight could kill. Gerard did not think that he would not give the sight to his children. Gerard discovered that two of his children did not have the sight.”
11. Otto II, Count of Guelders (c. 1210-1270), m. Philippe of Dammartin.
“Otto did not use the sight. Otto understood. To use the sight made one vulnerable. Otto simply protected himself.”
12. Reinald, Count of Guelders (c. 1255-1326), m. (2) Margaret of Flanders.
“Reinald did not use the sight. Reinald thought that he was being careful. Then Reinald discovered that his brother did not have the sight. That meant that Reinald his brother did not have the ability that his father had. That made Reinald think that Reinald should learn.”
13. Margareta of Guelders (c. 1286-1346), m. Diedrich VIII, Count of Cleves.
“Margareta. Margareta had the sight. Margareta understood. Margareta must not use the sight. Margareta had to preserve.”
14. Margareta Kleve (heiress of Kleves) (1305-1348), m. Adolf Mark (1300-1347)
“Margaret did not have a brother. Margaret her father did not have any ability. Margaret understood. The sight would leave the family. Margaret understood. Margaret must learn.”
15. Adolf, Bishop of Meunster and Count of Marck and Count of Cleves (c. 1334-1394)
“Adolf was a bishop. Adolf understood. The sight was punishable. Adolf had to choose. If Adolf had the ability and did not use it, the ability would disappear. Adolf used the ability. Adolf had no good fortune. Adolf acted as he saw. Adolf did not prosper.”
16. Adolf, Duke of Kleve (1373-1448)
“Adolf was able. Adolf was summoned. Adolf had the sight. Adolf was unhurt.”
(continued Oct. 28-30, 2018)
17. Katharina of Cleves (1417-1479), m. Arnoud, Duke of Guelders (1410-1473).
“Katharina. Katharina had the sight. Katharina used the sight. Katharina understood. The sight must be used.”
“Arnoud had the sight. Arnoud did not use the sight. Arnoud simply understood that he was under an obligation to preserve the lineage.”
[Arnoud and Katharina had a daughter Maria, ancestor of the earlier Scottish royal lineage, and also a son Adolf, Duke of Guelders, who was ancestor of the later Scottish royal lineage (see down below). Because King James IV, King of Scots, was NOT the father of King James V (who was “given” to James IV by a cousin because his own children kept being murdered as infants), the later Scottish royal lineage does not descend from the earlier one.
EARLIER SCOTTISH ROYAL LINEAGE
18. Maria of Guelders (1434-1463) , m. King James II of Scotland (1430-1460).
“Maria of Guelders. Maria was able to use the sight. Maria was unable to see good things. Maria lived in a land where people killed each other to gain power.”
Maria’s Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_of_Guelders
19. King James III (1451-1488), m. Margaret of Denmark.
“James, King of the Scots. James had the sight. James used the sight. James saw that James would not be a good king. James followed what James saw.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_III_of_Scotland
20. King James IV (1473-1513).
“James IV, King of Scots. James had the sight. James used the sight. James understood. The sight would leave Scotland.” James’s Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_IV_of_Scotland
[Aside from King James’s daughter Catherine below, there is an additional lineage through another daughter Hester, into the Lamont/Young family – see further below.]
21. Catherine (daughter of James IV by Margaret Boyd), m. James Douglas, 3rd Earl of Morton.
“Catharina. Catharina was a woman without a name. Catharina knew that her husband would give her a name. Catharina was pleased with the name she got. Catharina knew, because of the sight, that Catharina would be the ancestor of a king.”
22. Margaret Douglas (c. 1515-1581), m. James Hamilton, 2nd Earl of Arran.
“Margaret was a woman with a name. Margaret married a man with a good name. Margaret understood. Margaret must not use the sight.”
[Margaret had two daughters with descents in my family tree. One line leads down to the Wallace family, which intermarried with the Jones family, which had an un-persecuted lineage through their Gash/Wentworth ancestors back to Valoines/Criketot. The other line leads to a marriage into the Lamont/Young family, which has an independent descent from King James IV (see page 7)].
DESCENT TO WALLACE
(which later merges with the Wentworth/Gash descent from the Valoines/Criketot lineage)
23. Jean Hamilton [daughter of Margaret (Douglas) Hamilton].
“Jean was a woman who did not obey. Jean saw. Jean did.”
24. Margaret Hamilton (raised by her grandparents), m. Alexander Pethien (1560-1611)
“Margaret Hamilton had the name of her grandfather. Margaret understood. Margaret was preserving a lineage.”
25. Andrew (“Hugh”) Peden, m. Isabella Robb.
“Andrew knew. Andrew saw. Andrew left Scotland.”
26. James Peden (b. abt 1630)
“James was born in Scotland. James understood. James saw. James must leave. James and his father were respected in Ireland.”
27. James Peden (b. abt. 1683), not son of his father’s wife; m. Mary Mills.
“James had his father his name. James understood. The name meant that James would be able to marry well.”
28. Jane Peden, m. James McIlvey.
“Jane, daughter of James, had the sight. Jane understood. The sight was not persecuted. The sight was not well received. Jane was not able to use the sight.”
29. Jane McIlvey, m. Joseph Wallace (d. 1807).
“Jane came to a new country. Jane understood. Jane her father gave an opportunity. Jane knew that the sight must find other families.”
30. William Wallace (c. 1780-1823), m. Mary Anne Nesbitt.
“William Wallace was from a family with a lineage. William had to leave. William left and found a new land. William settled and provided for his family. William needed to be away from the family that knew of William and his ancestry.”
31. Rev. William Donaldson Wallace (1816-1871), m. Martha Jones (1820-1882), with an un-persecuted lineage from the Valoines/Criketot marriage (see that article).
“Rev. William Donaldson Wallace was of the opinion that the sight was beneficial. However, William has been re-evaluating. William used the sight for good. Now William has heard stories of the sight simply showing terrible things. William does not have the same feeling that he had before.” [This statement contrasts somewhat with Rev. William Wallace’s statement in the article on the Valoines/Criketot lineage.]
32. Julia Ann Wallace (1837-1872), m. William Joseph Coons (descended from the later Scottish royal lineage; see #34 in that lineage below, on page 11.)
“Julia had the sight. Julia was taught. Julia understood. Julia had to carry the sight without using it.”
Julia’s family tree: https://www.wikitree.com/genealogy/Wallace-Family-Tree-3991
33. Nettie (Coons) Tobey: See #35 in the later Scottish royal lineage on p. 11.
DESCENT TO YOUNG
23. Barbara Hamilton, daughter of Margaret (Douglas) Hamilton (see above).
Barbara Hamilton m. (1) Alexander Gordon.
“Barbara understood. Barbara must use the sight. Barbara had to be very careful. Barbara was able.”
24. Barbara Gordon, m. John Alexander.
“Barbara was a woman with no father. Barbara understood. Barbara must marry. Barbara did not object.”
25. John Alexander, emigrated to Virginia.
“John Alexander was the son of a man who did not have the sight. John inherited the sight from his mother. John did not have the ability to use it without being seen. John was always being watched.”
26. Mary Alexander, m. John Wallace.
“Mary grew up in a new land. Mary understood. The sight was not feared. Mary was able to learn. Mary her father gave her some instruction.”
27. Elizabeth Wallace, m. William Young.
“Elizabeth understood. Elizabeth had the sight. Elizabeth had to use the sight. Elizabeth had to accept whatever Elizabeth saw. Elizabeth looked. Elizabeth did not.”
28. Henry Young (c. 1745-1833) – See the Lamont/Young lineage below.
(Oct. 30-Nov. 1, 2018) For a note on the very early history of Clan Lamont, see https://www.electricscotland.com/history/nation/lamond.htm
According to the ancestors, John Lamont, husband of Mary Young (see #24 below) was nephew (not the son) of Gilbert Lamont. Gilbert and John were the sons of John, who was son of John Lamont by the daughter of King James IV.
21. Hester, daughter of King James IV, m. John Lamont.
Hester: “Hester had no way of knowing who was her father. Hester understood. There would come a time. Hester saw the name. Hester did not believe.”
John Lamont: “John Lamont had the sight. John knew of his descent. Lamont descended directly from the King of Ireland.”
22. John Lamont.
“John Lamont. John was not a royal heir. John had no hope of becoming King. John just had royal blood. That was enough. John was suspected of plotting to kill the King. John was not given any opportunity to defend himself. John was cut down.”
23. John (not his elder brother Gilbert) Lamont.
“John was not the heir. John his brother Gilbert was cut down. John became the heir. John his father was cut down. John became the lord.”
24. John Lamont, m. Mary Young. See http://www.brokerdirectmlsohio.com/charryoung/early.html
“John was the lord. John had the sight. John, unlike his father, used the sight. John did not see what happened. John was unable.” [In other words, John, one of the leaders of Clan Lamont, did not see his death in the 1646 massacre that exterminated the leadership of the clan.]
25. Andrew (Lamont) Young. See http://www.brokerdirectmlsohio.com/charryoung/early.html
“Andrew was Lamont. Andrew became Young. Andrew hid. Andrew was never safe.”
26. John Young.
“John Young. John was unable. John was not healthy. John had a gift. This gift helped other people. This gift could not be used to help oneself. John did not see the value of the gift. John was not inclined to use the gift.”
27. William Young, partner of Elizabeth Wallace (see p. 7 above).
“William was able to use the gift. William understood that the gift was meant to be used. If it wasn’t used, then it would disappear. William used the gift. William lived a long and healthy life.”
28. Henry Young (c. 1745-1833), son of William by a woman who was not his wedded wife – see #27 in the “Earlier Scottish Royal Lineage” on page 7 above.
“Henry Young was unable. Henry Young was not strong. Henry Young had a gift. The gift gave knowledge about the future. The gift was not helpful. Henry did not understand that it was only to help other people. Henry tried. Henry saw what he would become. Henry saw a very old man. The very old man had a young family. Henry did not think this was possible. Henry did not marry. Henry had a family with a woman who was not his wife. The woman was able to be as a wife. Henry then married her niece. This made Henry bigamous. Henry did not think of the vision until after he remembered. His wife was unable to think of the gift as something unhelpful. Henry was able to think of his wife and what she needed. That made Henry realize that the gift showed how to help others.”
29. Henry Young, Jr. (c. 1782-1827), m. Dempsey Buckelew.
“Henry had no knowledge of how to use the gift. Henry simply had the ability to focus. This gave Henry an image. The image was of the future. That was all that Henry ever did.”
30. William Young (1809-1872), m. Susan White (see #32 in the “Later Scottish Royal Lineage” on p. 12.
Susan also descends from the Cecil/Davis descent from the un-persecuted Valoines/Criketot lineage.)
“William had a gift. William had no understanding. William had no training. William simply saw. William married a woman who had the gift. William learned. Then William was able to think of helping. That gave an image. William could do what was shown. If he did, the result was good.”
31. William Henry Young (b. 1845) m. Jane (Roberts) Yapp (who has a mother’s-line descent from Prideaux and an un-persecuted “second sight” descent from the earlier Criketot lineage).
“William was known as Henry. William had the gift. William used the gift. William saw. William had to marry. William resisted. William did not obey fully. William married but gave away the daughter. William had to face the consequences. William had no family. William did not have a good position. William simply was a farmer.”
32. Florence Willard Stewart (1874-1924), daughter of William and Jane Young, m. Dr. Charles Franklin Burkhalter (who has an un-persecuted “second sight” lineage through the Griesheimer family back to Coucy).
“Florence had a gift. Florence had no way of using the gift. Florence had no knowledge. Florence had no one to talk to about it. Florence understood. There was something about her family. Florence learned that her mother was not her real mother. That meant that Florence had to find her real mother. That way Florence could ask someone about what she was able to do. That happened. Florence knew. And Florence had the ability to think of helping. That meant that the gift was useful.”
33. Evelyn Mae Burkhalter (1995-1997), m. Dr. Ralph O. Stickler
Evelyn: “Evelyn had a gift. Evelyn did not use it. Evelyn had the impression that it should not be used. Evelyn does not know why.”
Evelyn’s family tree: https://www.wikitree.com/genealogy/Burkhalter-Family-Tree-441
Ralph: “Ralph had a gift. Ralph knew that it came from both of his parents. Ralph understood. Ralph had to preserve the gift. Ralph wasn’t supposed to use it.” Ralph’s family tree: https://www.wikitree.com/genealogy/Stickler-Family-Tree-220
34. Phyllis Stickler (1931-1975), m. (2) Roger Schmeeckle
“Phyllis did not think of what she saw. Phyllis saw things that she knew would happen. Phyllis did not seek the vision. Phyllis eventually understood that the thing that she saw in a particular way would happen. Phyllis understood that, when she thought of helping and saw, the result would be clear. This happened regularly. Phyllis was good at helping people.”
LATER SCOTTISH ROYAL LINEAGE
18. Adolf (1438-1477), Duke of Guelders, son of Arnoud, Duke of Guelders by Katharina of Cleves (#17 above). Adolf’s Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf,_Duke_of_Guelders
“Adolf was a man with a heritage. Adolf understood. Adolf was preserving. Adolf must not use the sight. Adolf must simply allow the instructions to be passed.”
19. Philippa of Guelders, wife of Rene de Lorraine-Vaudemont II (1451-1508), Duke of Lorraine.
“Philippa was the daughter of a man who never used the sight. Philippa understood. Philippa had to use the sight so the sight would not leave. Philippa looked. Philippa saw. A lineage would continue to a line of kings. Philippa had to use the sight to protect her family. Philippa did that.”
Philippa’s Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippa_of_Guelders
20. Claude of Lorraine (1496-1550), 1st Duke of Guise.
“Claude had the sight. Claude knew, because of his sight, that Claude should not try to rise. Claude had to simply agree with others. Claude was able to not make conflict. This led Claude to be able to marry his daughter to the King of the Scots.”
Claude’s Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude,_Duke_of_Guise
21. Mary of Guise (1515-1560), married James V, King of Scots; later Queen Regent during her daughter’s minority. Mary’s Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_of_Guise
“Mary has much to say. Mary had the sight. Mary understands that now is not the time to tell her story. Mary had the opportunity to rule. As the regent for a daughter, Mary understood that Mary would have more power than a regent would normally have. Mary had to be wise. Mary had the sight. Mary used the sight for the good.”
22. Mary Queen of Scots (1542-1587). Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary,_Queen_of_Scots
(recorded Oct. 28, 2018) “Mary, Queen of Scots. Mary had a son by her husband Francis, King of France. Francis died. Mary was pregnant. Mary fled. Mary went away from where she was expected. Mary was aware. Mary understood. Mary had the heir, if he was a son. The heir would be killed.
“Mary knew, if she was able to survive, that Mary would not be able to claim the throne of France for her son. The son must not think of his rightful inheritance. Mary ensured that the son would be brought up in a way that made him able to return to England. Mary wanted her son to learn English. This was not typical. Mary knew, when Mary arrived in Russia, that Mary was not going to be able to stay long. Mary gave birth. Mary left her son. Mary knew, if Mary stayed, that Mary would not be allowed to leave. Mary was the Queen. Mary knew, because of her father’s gift, that Mary had to be in Scotland. This is what Mary understood.”
(added Oct. 30, 2018) “Mary knew that her mother had the sight. Mary understood that her father also had the sight. Mary knew, before her marriage, that her father had foreseen that Mary had to stay in Scotland. Mary left Scotland. Mary knew that this was contrary to her father his vision. Mary understood. Mary had to return. Mary thinks, because she left, that something happened. Mary should have refused. Mary had the ability to refuse to marry the King of France. Mary understood. Mary caused a change.”
Queen Mary’s lineage splits, with one line through Henry, her son by the King of France, and the other line through her son James, king of Scotland and England. James was the son of Queen Mary by David Rizzio, a lutist and her personal secretary, descended from the Italian noble houses of Este and Sforza.
QUEEN MARY’S LINE THROUGH HENRY OF FRANCE
23. Henry of France, m. Tatyana Romanov.
(Oct. 28, 2018) “Mary’s son will speak. Henry, son of Mary, was born in Russia. Henry was able to learn English. Henry understood. Henry had a heritage. Henry had a family with a lineage of kings. Henry had a family with a lineage of second sight. Henry had to preserve. Henry had to be anonymous. Henry understood enough English to leave Russia after he married. Henry understood. Henry had to not become Russian.” Henry’s wife was Tatyana, daughter of Feodor Nikitich Romanov, who became Patriarch Filaret of Mosccow, and who was father of the first Czar of the Romanov dynasty. See his Wikipedia page at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarch_Filaret_of_Moscow
(added Oct. 30, 2018) “Henry had the sight. Henry understood. Henry had a lineage to protect. Henry would not be a prominent man. Henry would have a line of descent to a man who would become king.”
24. Stephen Stewart
“Stephen had the sight. Stephen used the sight. Stephen didn’t think that the sight was helpful.”
25. Margaret Stewart, m. Henry, son of James, illegitimate son of Gov. John West of Virginia by Ursula, a granddaughter of King Edward VI. (See “Ancestral Memories: Tudor Descents.”)
“Margaret understood. Margaret must use the sight. Margaret understood. What Margaret saw must be followed. Margaret followed.”
26. Mildred, m. Michael Tavenor.
“Mildred did not have a strong sight. Mildred thinks this was because her father had the sight in a lineage that was persecuted. Mildred did not think that the sight was harmful. Mildred used the sight when she wanted to try to help someone.”
27. Elizabeth Tavenor, m. John Mathews (with a persecuted lineage; his father’s father’s father’s father’s father was burned at the stake for having the sight).
“Elizabeth knew, because of her lineage, that Elizabeth would not have the full sight. Elizabeth had the sight. The sight showed Elizabeth. Elizabeth would marry a man without the sight. Elizabeth knew, because of her father, that Elizabeth would not give the sight to all of her children. This is what happened.”
John Mathews: "John Mathews was not able to see. John could tell when something was going to happen."
28. Elizabeth Mathews (d. 1736), m. David Holloway. (For his ancestry back to King Henry VIII, see “Ancestral Memories: Tudor Descents.”)
“Elizabeth had the sight. Elizabeth had the strong sight. Elizabeth understood. The sight had been repaired. Elizabeth must use the sight. Elizabeth thought that her husband would not object. Elizabeth hoped that Elizabeth and her husband would be able to give the sight to her children. The sight only went to one child.”
29. John Holloway (b. 1701). For his wife’s ancestry going back to King Edward VI, see “Ancestral Memories: Tudor Descents.”
“John Holloway. John Holloway was the man who was under the flag. The flag was under the fleet. The fleet was in the harbor. The harbor was under attack. The flag was seized. John Holloway was remembered.”
30. James Holloway (c. 1730-1778), m. Judith Booker. (For her ancestry, see “Ancestral Memories: Tudor Descents.”)
“James Holloway. James was a man who had a father who was well known. James understood. James his father used the sight. The sight showed. James his father acted. James understood. James must do as the sight showed. James looked. The sight showed. James did.”
31. Ashby Holloway (c. 1755-1815), m. Samuel Durham. (For his ancestry, see “Colclough/Durham/Sachevell/Fitton.”)
“Ashby. Ashby had the sight. Ashby knew. Ashby had to look. Ashby had to act. Ashby acted. The sight did not fail.”
32. Lousanna Durham (b. 1782), m. Mathew Kelly.
“Lousanna. Lousanna had the sight. Lousanna did not act. The sight did not show any action. Lousanna understood. Lousanna was to simply give the sight to her daughter.”
33. Mahala Kelly (1808-bef. 1838), m. Silas Coons.
“Mahala Kelley. Mahala had the sight. Mahala married a man with a little bit of the sight. Mahala understood. Mahala was being given the opportunity to preserve the sight. This happened.”
Mahala’s family tree: https://www.wikitree.com/genealogy/Kelly-Family-Tree-4782
34. William Joseph Coons (1833-1916), m. Julia Ann Wallace (#32 in the earlier Scottish royal lineage).
William: “William had the sight. William understood. William did not use the sight. William acted. William did not use the sight. William returned. William thought that the sight was not helpful. William simply acted as if he had no sight.” [William “acted” and “returned”: see his full story at https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Ancestral_Memories:_William_Coons_and_Julia_Wallace , with his experience as a soldier in General Sherman’s army.
35. Nettie Ellen Coons (1868-1948), m. William Walter Tobey, who had an un-persecuted lineage through the Delano family from Coucy.
Nettie: “Nettie had the sight. Nettie looked. Nettie understood. Nettie would be betrayed. Nettie never looked again.”
Nettie’s family tree: https://www.wikitree.com/genealogy/Coons-Family-Tree-328
36. Lola Fern Tobey, m. Jacob Daniel Schmeeckle.
“Fern. Fern had the sight. Fern didn’t know what she had. Fern never learned. Fern just ‘knew.’”
Fern’s family tree: https://www.wikitree.com/genealogy/Tobey-Family-Tree-591
QUEEN MARY’S LINE THROUGH KING JAMES
23. James VI, King of Scots (James I, King of England) (1566-1625), m. Anne of Denmark.
“King James had the sight. King James was King. King James disobeyed. King James knew. His disobedience would cost his heirs.”
King James’s Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_VI_and_I
24. Henry (1594-1612), eldest son of King James, poisoned two years after his private marriage to Margaret Courtenay, granddaughter of King Edward VI (see “Ancestral Memories: Tudor Descents.”)
“Henry understood. Henry was to be denied.” Henry’s Wikipedia page:
25. Charles Stewart.
“Charles had the sight. Charles was unable to see anything except not being prominent. Charles looked for success. The sight never showed.”
26. Margaret Stewart, married Abraham White, grandson of Virginia Governor John West (see “Ancestral Memories: Tudor Descents.”)
Margaret: “Margaret had the sight. Margaret understood. Margaret had to leave. Margaret went to Virginia. There was a lack of women. Margaret understood. There would be a husband.”
Abraham: “Abraham had the sight, but it was not good. Abraham saw. Abraham did not understand.”
27. Abraham White, m. Frances Dolman, daughter of Philip Dolman by Frances, daughter of Walter Vavasour, from a family with an ancient lineage – and the next two generations in this White lineage married Vavasour descendants (see below).
Abraham: “Abraham had the sight. Abraham did not look. Abraham knew that Abraham was forbidden.”
28. Abraham White, m. Mary, daughter of Abel Hastings, son of Geoffrey, son of John by Ethel, bastard daughter of Rauf Vavasour.
Abraham: “Abraham did not think that Abraham had the sight. Abraham did not know of the sight. Abraham saw. Abraham knew. Abraham wondered.”
29. Abraham White, m. Esther, daughter of Edward Wright, son of John Wright (immigrant to Virginia), who was a bastard son of John, third son of Richard Revel, who was great-grandson of Rauf Vavasour (see immediately above).
Abraham: “Abraham had the sight. Abraham was commanded to look. Abraham saw. Abraham knew. The sight was being preserved. The sight must not be used.”
30. Benjamin White (c. 1760-1825), m. Sukee (Susan) Bartee.
“Benjamin had the sight. Benjamin did not look. Benjamin understood. The sight was not for him.”
31. Jonathan White (1788-1833), m. Katie (Catherine) Mead.
“Jonathan. Jonathan had the sight. Jonathan was commanded. Jonathan looked. Jonathan saw. A lineage of kings was in his family. Jonathan looked. Jonathan knew. Jonathan should never look again.”
32. Susan White (1829-1895), m. William Young (#30 in the Lamont/Young lineage above).
“Susan had the sight. Susan did not look. Susan knew. The sight was not for Susan.”
33. William Henry Young – see #31 in the Lamont/Young lineage above.
APPENDIX: Explaining Communicating with Ancestors
Humans have a natural ability to communicate with deceased ancestors. In some countries this ability is taken for granted, but in “modern” western society, this ability has been largely lost.
Here is my ancestor Anschetil d’Harcourt’s explanation of how he learned to communicate with ancestors: “When my grandfather died, I was young. I was sad because I wanted to be close to him. I asked how I could talk to him. My father said: Think of your grandfather. Words will appear. That is your grandfather.”
Here is a brief quote from my ancestor Bishop Tobey Mathew (taken from his remarks at the end of this page):
“Bishop understood, because of his role in the Church, that Bishop had to accept the accepted teaching on this. This was simple: The ability existed, so God must have had a reason.”
I posted the following explanation of the proper way to communicate with ancestors (written as the ancestors guided me) at wikitree, on Jan. 9, 2018: https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/535187/communicating-with-ancestors
Over a year ago, I was told that it is possible to communicate with deceased ancestors, but I was cautioned to always have a respectful attitude when talking to them. I decided to try it and see what happened, and it worked…
On the “Day of the Dead” (the day after Halloween), I thought of the names of all of my grandparents and their parents and grandparents, and they started talking to me. Remorse came up immediately for some of them. I learned that women often had ongoing connections with living daughters and granddaughters, but most of the men had been isolated since their deaths. I was told – several times – that after death there is a kind of separation of what we call the soul into two parts. Each ancestor has a part that remains accessible to descendants, and a part that goes elsewhere. Memories are incomplete.
Ancestors want to see the well-being of their descendants. Ancestors also want to be able to talk to their own parents and children. Ancestors hope that living descendants will work their way back from their parents or grandparents to more distant ancestors, one generation at a time. This allows children and parents among the ancestors to talk to each other, when a living descendant is open to ancestral communication.
Ancestors want to avoid hearing from descendants who just want to ask questions about the family tree. Ancestors may not communicate with descendants with only this in mind. For this reason, it is once again a good idea to work your back from one generation to the next. Ancestors believe that descendants who are respectful will be pleased to talk about their own lives. Ancestors want their descendants to live will, and ancestors are concerned when descendants are struggling. Ancestors have the ability to observe the lives of living descendants, but they often do not do so. Ancestors may be inclined to be more observant after a descendant contacts an ancestor, especially if that ancestor had not had any communication with descendants before.
Some ancestors, especially those who were devoutly religious, may avoid communicating with descendants who don’t share their moral values.
Husbands and wives who didn’t get along with each other may be able to begin to communicate about issues that they never talked about before death.
One final point – I have heard some disturbing stories from ancestors, and proper respect demands that the ancestor be asked for permission before sharing such stories.
[And then a follow-up post on Jan. 10, 2018]:
On Nov. 1, 2016, I made a point of respectfully focusing on the names of each grandparent, great-grandparent and great-great-grandparent. Then I started listening, focusing on each great-great-grandparent, starting at the top of my 5-generation chart and working haphazardly down the list. When I got to my mother's side of the family, I talked to my Stickler great-grandparents, and then had to end because I was getting overwhelmed; I followed up the following day.
Here are my notes (abridged to remove bits that ancestors would prefer not to share):
"Gottlieb [Schmeeckle] regretted that he had been unable to provide a comfortable widowhood for Barbara, but he had failed to prosper after coming to Nebraska in his elder years. Jacob Zimmerman said that he had been unable to prevent his daughter from marrying outside the Amish church, and then had been unable to shun her after she did so, and so the congregation ended up shunning their minister. Prince Tobey talked about being unable to work on the trip through California (because he was so old), but he had skillfully directed the others, who benefited from his direction. And then back in Nebraska, he was well-received by his children as he lived out his years, once again because of his practical wisdom. I had mistakenly called “Sarah Hunt,” and Prince’s wife Esther talked after him, saying that because of her hips, she was unable to work properly, and mentioned losing six of her children. Her mother Sarah later spoke up, wondering why I had called her. I first said that she was the only ancestor who had been born in Vermont where I grew up, and then explained the mistake, that I had meant to name her daughter Esther. Sarah said that Esther, although unable to work well, had been good at building a loving home environment for her family. She said that there had never quite been enough in the town she lived in, but the community supported each other and together managed to make ends meet. James Gilliland Stickler [I heard him pronounce “Jilliland,” not “Guilliland,” as I had always imagined the pronunciation] said that he had been unable to give good educations to all his children, so he focused his resources on his son Ralph, with the idea that Ralph would pay for the educations of his brothers’ children; and so he did. James said that Ralph’s wife had never been satisfied, and made it impossible for James to enjoy a relationship with his son as an adult. James’s wife Mercy Ann Singley said that she had been a simple woman, and was surprised that anyone had remembered her. And that was when it first occurred to me that I could have extended conversations with these people."
I "heard" all of these conversations in plain English as I am used to speaking. It occurred to me that my great-great-grandfather Gottlieb Schmeeckle spoke little if any English when alive. When I recently talked to distant German ancestors, I also "heard" their thoughts in plain English. However, at times there was confusion about the proper choice of a word, and I indicated that in my first "Ancestral Memories" free space page by putting the word in question in parentheses. [See https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Ancestral_Memories:_The_Schm%C3%BCckle_Family_in_Einod ] In each of these cases, the ancestor and I agreed on the particular word to use, and then the ancestor moved on with his/her story. I don't have any explanation for how I hear their words; it's part of the mystery of what is going on.
(Aug. 26, 2018) “Bishop Tobey Mathews is speaking, if that is the correct word. Bishop Tobey Mathews will simply refer to himself as Bishop. Bishop understood, before he died, that he would be able to communicate with descendants. Bishop understood that descendants would have the choice. Bishop also understood that he had the choice to communicate with ancestors. Bishop knew, from an early age, that he could communicate with his mother. This was because his mother died when he was three years old. Bishop understood, because of this experience, that there was a clear reason for this. Children who lost the parents had the ability to continue in their time of need.
“Bishop never thought beyond this. Bishop simply understood that this was common. Bishop understood, because of his role in the Church, that Bishop had to accept the accepted teaching on this. This was simple: The ability existed, so God must have had a reason. Bishop understood, because of this way of thinking, that people would think of rational explanations. This is what happened. Bishop understood, after talking to one man, that some people had the experience of counseling ancestors. This was a shock. Ancestors were to be respected. This was universally accepted. Giving counsel went counter to a general attitude of respect, or at least Bishop thought so. Bishop later thought that giving aid to one in need is always a gesture of respect. But Bishop was never comfortable with the thought of counseling an ancestor.
“Bishop will clarify. Counseling an ancestor means giving advice related to a problem in a family relationship. If a living descendant has a grandfather who could not compel the obedience of his wife, for example, the living descendant had to accommodate the discord when trying to communicate with his grandparents. This could lead to a situation where the living descendant gave advice to the grandparents, allowing them to coexist while not denying either one communication with the grandchild.
“Bishop understood, after learning about the ability to communicate with ancestors, that he could ask ancestors about family legends. Bishop discovered that his family was not from where the coat of arms said. (There were two Mathew coats of arms, and Bishop’s family began using the coat from the wrong branch.) This surprised Bishop. Bishop understood that the Mathew family was Welsh. And this was certainly what Bishop found. Bishop understood that his family was from a landowning class. Bishop understood that in Wales, the social structure was different. Bishop found that some of his ancestors weren’t Welsh. And this surprised Bishop.”